Skashion said:If you apply that logic to all people fighting for someone other than the official forces of their nation - including Gurkhas, fair enough.JoeMercer'sWay said:Skashion said:No doubt some of them will have gone with the best of intentions. It wasn't that long ago, that the vast majority of this forum wanted Assad gone and were supporting people fighting him, now, because of ISIS, it seems at least a few on here will refuse to distinguish between those fighting Assad for legitimate reasons and those chopping heads off and establishing caliphates. It seems to me that if these men have become disillusioned about fighting fellow rebels, these are the people that went there with good intentions and who just a year ago, most people on this forum were supporting.
I'm sorry, but you don't go off to fight and then decide you want to leave when the going gets tough, this isn't forced conscription, they chose to go, they should accept the consequences.
Besides, it was more than just IS who were murdering families, cutting foetuses out of women's wombs and generally being c**ts in Syria well over a year ago in the name of the rebels. The truth was there, the warnings about what these people would do if they got a foothold were there and yet the West still wanted to support them.
Doesn't strike me as sensible to exacerbate a conflict by refusing to allow people back who signed up for a different war than they ended up fighting. If people want to abandon Jihad, they should be encouraged, not pushed back into it by lack of options.
OK, I have a different opinion.JoeMercer'sWay said:No, I'm not going to accept people who have been associated with multiple atrocities against civilians coming home and not facing the consequences of their actions, especially when they'll get back on the street and start trying to recruit youngsters to go and do the dirty work they evidently didn't have the balls to meet their fate over.
JoeMercer'sWay said:Skashion said:If you apply that logic to all people fighting for someone other than the official forces of their nation - including Gurkhas, fair enough.JoeMercer'sWay said:I'm sorry, but you don't go off to fight and then decide you want to leave when the going gets tough, this isn't forced conscription, they chose to go, they should accept the consequences.
Besides, it was more than just IS who were murdering families, cutting foetuses out of women's wombs and generally being c**ts in Syria well over a year ago in the name of the rebels. The truth was there, the warnings about what these people would do if they got a foothold were there and yet the West still wanted to support them.
Doesn't strike me as sensible to exacerbate a conflict by refusing to allow people back who signed up for a different war than they ended up fighting. If people want to abandon Jihad, they should be encouraged, not pushed back into it by lack of options.
No, I'm not going to accept people who have been associated with multiple atrocities against civilians coming home and not facing the consequences of their actions, especially when they'll get back on the street and start trying to recruit youngsters to go and do the dirty work they evidently didn't have the balls to meet their fate over.
JoeMercer'sWay said:Skashion said:If you apply that logic to all people fighting for someone other than the official forces of their nation - including Gurkhas, fair enough.JoeMercer'sWay said:I'm sorry, but you don't go off to fight and then decide you want to leave when the going gets tough, this isn't forced conscription, they chose to go, they should accept the consequences.
Besides, it was more than just IS who were murdering families, cutting foetuses out of women's wombs and generally being c**ts in Syria well over a year ago in the name of the rebels. The truth was there, the warnings about what these people would do if they got a foothold were there and yet the West still wanted to support them.
Doesn't strike me as sensible to exacerbate a conflict by refusing to allow people back who signed up for a different war than they ended up fighting. If people want to abandon Jihad, they should be encouraged, not pushed back into it by lack of options.
No, I'm not going to accept people who have been associated with multiple atrocities against civilians coming home and not facing the consequences of their actions, especially when they'll get back on the street and start trying to recruit youngsters to go and do the dirty work they evidently didn't have the balls to meet their fate over.
Skashion said:OK, I have a different opinion.JoeMercer'sWay said:No, I'm not going to accept people who have been associated with multiple atrocities against civilians coming home and not facing the consequences of their actions, especially when they'll get back on the street and start trying to recruit youngsters to go and do the dirty work they evidently didn't have the balls to meet their fate over.
So you think it's a good idea to force people into fighting when they no longer want to?JoeMercer'sWay said:Skashion said:OK, I have a different opinion.JoeMercer'sWay said:No, I'm not going to accept people who have been associated with multiple atrocities against civilians coming home and not facing the consequences of their actions, especially when they'll get back on the street and start trying to recruit youngsters to go and do the dirty work they evidently didn't have the balls to meet their fate over.
so you don't think people who have been implicated in, or associated with (actively), groups that have committed atrocities against civilians should be punished?
Crab Paste! said:JoeMercer'sWay said:Skashion said:If you apply that logic to all people fighting for someone other than the official forces of their nation - including Gurkhas, fair enough.
Doesn't strike me as sensible to exacerbate a conflict by refusing to allow people back who signed up for a different war than they ended up fighting. If people want to abandon Jihad, they should be encouraged, not pushed back into it by lack of options.
No, I'm not going to accept people who have been associated with multiple atrocities against civilians coming home and not facing the consequences of their actions, especially when they'll get back on the street and start trying to recruit youngsters to go and do the dirty work they evidently didn't have the balls to meet their fate over.
If they are disillusioned with the cause they signed up for, then they are more likely to actively discourage others from going to do the same thing.
Skashion said:So you think it's a good idea to force people into fighting when they no longer want to?JoeMercer'sWay said:Skashion said:OK, I have a different opinion.
so you don't think people who have been implicated in, or associated with (actively), groups that have committed atrocities against civilians should be punished?
FromPollockToSilva said:JoeMercer'sWay said:Skashion said:If you apply that logic to all people fighting for someone other than the official forces of their nation - including Gurkhas, fair enough.
Doesn't strike me as sensible to exacerbate a conflict by refusing to allow people back who signed up for a different war than they ended up fighting. If people want to abandon Jihad, they should be encouraged, not pushed back into it by lack of options.
No, I'm not going to accept people who have been associated with multiple atrocities against civilians coming home and not facing the consequences of their actions, especially when they'll get back on the street and start trying to recruit youngsters to go and do the dirty work they evidently didn't have the balls to meet their fate over.
Like the army?